While the outrage at the book burning is comical considering the muted response to rapes and honor-killings and gay hangings and stonings in the name of Islam, it bears noting that nearly all right-thinking conservatives do not approve of burning the Qu'ran.

If honor killings and hangings and stonings were happening here in the States, you would see an entirely different level of outrage. Not that it makes it right, but a lot of Americans have very little knowledge / opinion on what goes on outside our borders. So the fact that you think the qu'ran burning outrage is comical is just a little off the mark.

Except there are honor killings going on here, Pinko. Not that you and your ilk will ever open your eyes enough to see them.

There are honor killings in the US.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,598689,00.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-11-29-honor-killings-in-the-US_N.htm

Ok, so there are a few instances of honor killing here in the States. By no means is it societally accepted at all, though. And in all those cases, the murderers were treated just like they should be: as murderers.

So let me get this straight.

A muslim cab driver is nearly stabbed to death by a man who apparently attacked him because he identified himself as a muslim, and this is considered an outrage by the left, evidence of a rising tide of violence against muslims, and a direct result of the opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque.

But when at least eight muslim-American women are murdered in “honor killings” by extremist muslims in the last two years, these are regrettable but nothing to worry about?

Burning books is bad and sounds like Nazis.

Instead they should just open them to page 66 and then take a big shit on them with a huge log or show someone pissing a whole bud 12 pack on them. Make some nice tasteful blowup photos and call it art. Hell they could probably get a sweet NEA grant and live off of the money for the next year too.

Just a few Tom. And the victims were those icky brown people you leftists look down on.

he, like most muslim supporters, probably thinks they had it coming to them.

Yes Yes yes…and we are all in danger of Sharia Law overcoming America. LOL

Palin is against it? What are the libs to think now?

Many a european country would sound just like you about 20 yrs ago………now they arent LOL about it. I would proceed with caution.

I'm sure they'll let us know as soon as their new talking points are issued to them…

What kind of “caution” exactly is needed?

I would hope that everyone is against it because it is an act of intentional violence, destruction, and debasement. What is disingenuous about Palin's disavowal, and that of other conservatives, is the equivalence that is being made between the perceived “insensitivity” of the ground zero mosque builders and the “insensitivity” of the Koran burners. There is no equivalence, so conservatives should stop making it so. By equating opposition to the construction of the mosque as coming from the same motivation as opposition to an intentional burning of the Koran, the goal is to make mosque building next to ground zero and Koran burning in Florida as parallel expressions of “insensitivity.” It ignores any evaluation of intentionality of the acts themselves. Let me characterize this distinction in two ways. First, the mosque builders themselves have said their intention in building the mosque is to foster greater harmony between Islam and the other religions that are practiced in our country. Their intention is positive and constructive (as represented in building a place of worship and interfaith community programming). The intentions of the Koran burners are clearly negative and constructive. They are being intentionally inflammatory. Second, let's look at the root of opposition to both the ground zero mosque and the Koran burning. My understanding of opposition to the ground zero mosque is its location, not the act of constructing a mosque itself. So if the mosque were moved some “respectful” distance from the site of ground zero, then presumably opposition to it would dissipate. But a Koran burning could happen anywhere in the U.S. and opposition to it would, one presumes, remain. A fairer comparison would be if a group of radical fundamentalist Muslims engaged in a provocative Bible burning in the U.S. as a statement about Christianity. And we can certainly see the difference between the “insensitivity” of that kind of action relative to the construction of a mosque near to ground zero. So creating a kind of equivalence between the building of the mosque near ground zero to that of burning the Koran is absurd on its face. And those who can't oppose the burning of the Koran without making such an equivalence are just engaging in more anti-ground zero mosque demagoguery.

No, no, and no. It is not simply “insensitive and an unnecessary provocation” — it is intentionally destructive, demeaning, and hateful. The construction of the ground zero mosque is nowhere near in the same category of intent.

Because you say so.

Of course, you only see what you want to see, so…

“People have a constitutional right to burn a Koran if they want to, but doing so is insensitive and an unnecessary provocation – much like building a mosque at Ground Zero.”

Building a community center with a prayer center in lower Manhattan is nothing like the burning of the Koran.

How about it jackasses. Is a Bible burning the same as building a Christian community center two blocks away from the Oklahoma City right wing terrorist attack.

You people are fucking morons. And Sarah Palin is scum. The worst our great country has to offer..

Take your bigotry and hate and go fuck yourselves.

MichaelAlan [Moderator] 3 hours ago

Palin is against it? What are the libs to think now?

Nothing new at all. What we have known all along.

Palin is an idiot. And her followers are even more idiotic.

overt trolling flagged.

Can we get a clean up here?

TR

I think he means just watch your words lest you have to eat them..??

Wow…way to bring the substantive debate points, dipshit. Still haven't been issued your talking points on this subject yet? Or was your above post?

Too little, too late (again).

“It is not simply “insensitive and an unnecessary provocation” — it is intentionally destructive, demeaning, and hateful. ”

See, huck, that's your opinion You have a Constitutional right to express it, although I disagree with you. And burning a Qur'an is their way of exercising their Constitutional right to express themselves, although I disagree with them. Putting a crucifix in a jar of piss was one artist's (Andre Serrano) way of expressing himself, and, although I disagreed with him, it was his right. That's how it all works.

Nice way to blow off the torture and death experienced by women at the hands of Muslim men IN THIS COUNTRY.

So there were none happening… oh, sorry I mean they are happening… BUT IT'S STILL NO BIG DEAL.

That was a pathetic backtrack, Pinko.

Spare us the sanctimony huck. At the end of the day it's still a piece of paper. An inanimate object. And no, it's not imbued with the spirit of Allah as some sort of living artifact. It's a book.

Liberals and Muslims burn American flags pretty much non-stop and that's perfectly cool, but now suddenly this form of expression is “dangerous” and “violent” and “hateful” because your precious Muslims have to deal with it.

It's called freedom and pluralism. Deal with it because it's YOUR problem. If not, you're the ones responsible for the coming culture war.

Even if you think of it as just a book, the act itself is a destructive one with the intent to demean and debase. What other purpose could a book burning be for? I take no issue with the constitutional argument that protects the right to burn a book or a flag. And I'm not even concerned with the Koran burning as a “problem” or even the prospect of a looming culture war. I am only pointing out the false equivalence of the “insensitivity” of a Koran book burning with the “insensitivity” of constructing a mosque near to ground zero. They are not even in the same ball park. And I am claiming that folks like Sarah Palin who make this equivalence are being both cynical and disingenuous.

8 out of how many people murdered in America in the last 2 years?

Gee, I thought the right was opposed to hate crime laws and special assignments for the victims. Are these 8 murders more special or more heinous than any other murder?

Yes, they are special. They are committed in the name of Islam and excused by Liberals like you who call this cultural and defend Islam as a Religion of Peace.

So you do support hate crime legislation. Thank you for your honesty.

No I do not, and thank you for being a jerk who tries to divert the discussion away from your own idiocy.

This has NOTHING to do with hate crime legislation, Pinko, and you know it.

Not everything is a matter of opinion, CavalierX. You know this. It is not a matter of opinion whether a KKK cross-burning on the lawn of a black family is an racist expression of hate and intimidation. If you disagree with me that this act of burning a Koran is not destructive, demeaning, and hateful, then I would ask you what about the book burning is not an act that is destructive, demeaning, and hateful? Could it be classified as constructive, uplifting, respectful, and loving? Aside from the protected constitutional right to express an opinion, which you and I have no disagreement about, putting a crucifix in a jar of piss is clearly an act of disrespect and hate, whose intent was to demean and belittle Christianity. I don't even think Serrano would dispute this claim. He probably owns this claim and glories in it. And I can think of him as an arrogant ass about it, not to mention a piss-poor artist. But neither his bombast nor my reaction to his “art” has any bearing on what the objective truth is about the meaning of putting a crucific in a jar of piss. I thought conservatives believed in the idea of some kind of objective truth about things, including the purpose of particular behaviors. Like putting a crucifix in a jar of piss, the act of burning a Koran is either inherently an intentionally destructive, demeaning, and hateful act or it is not.

Hey, you're the one who's been arguing that one attempted murder is evidence of a rising tide of violence against muslims. Don't complain when we turn that standard around on you.

I'm so sad. I missed jharp's articulate response.

Not everything is a matter of opinion, CavalierX.

So we're wrong, you're right, and that's it? That's your whole argument? Weaksauce.

What is that even supposed to mean?

“If you disagree with me that this act of burning a Koran is not destructive, demeaning, and hateful, then I would ask you what about the book burning is not an act that is destructive, demeaning, and hateful?”

 

You misunderstand me, huck. I do think publicly burning a Qur'an is a provocative, demeaning act. The people of that church, however, do not share that opinion, any more than the proponents of the Ground Zero mosque share my opinon that building it right there is a provocative, demeaning act. If the imam has a right to build his mosque wherever he wants to, then the minister has the right to burn a Qur'an wherever he wants to. It's as simple as that.

I'm so sad. I missed jharp's articulate response.

Here you go. Thanks for asking.

“People have a constitutional right to burn a Koran if they want to, but doing so is insensitive and an unnecessary provocation – much like building a mosque at Ground Zero.

“Building a community center with a prayer center in lower Manhattan is nothing like the burning of the Koran.How about it jackasses. Is a Bible burning the same as building a Christian community center two blocks away from the Oklahoma City right wing terrorist attack.You people are fucking morons. And Sarah Palin is scum. The worst our
great country has to offer..Take your bigotry and hate and go fuck yourselves.

“Ok, so there are a few instances of honor killing here in the States. By no means is it societally accepted at all, though. And in all those cases, the murderers were treated just like they should be: as murderers. ”

Well, that's not at all what you said. You said “If honor killings and hangings and stonings were happening here in the States, you would see an entirely different level of outrage.” But when it was pointed out that such things do happen, where did the outrage go? technically, I suppose you were correct — we did see an entirely different level of outrage over honor killings: zero.

“8 out of how many people murdered in America in the last 2 years?”

I'd love to see your reaction were those women murdered by a Bible-waving preacher screaming “Jeeeeeesus!” as he killed them for having sex outside of marriage or something. You'd practically break your neck rushing to condemn the killings as a special and outrageous type of hate crime. But when Muslims do it in the name of their religion, it's “ho-hum, just another series of random, mundane murders; nothing to see here.”

So a few instances of honor killing is acceptable.

Interesting how your tone changes when an abortion doctor is murdered.

“So a few instances of honor killing is acceptable.”

That's not even close to what I said, clown.

More bile from Harp. Can your mommy get your medicine refilled?

The violin keeps getting tinier.

The only difference is that one act of d*ck-waving is an act of destruction and the other act of d*ck-waving is an act of building. Building a monument to victory (it wasn't called Cordoba by accident) or burning the iconography of an enemy are both acts of defiance and insensitivity.

The level of insensitivity is identical…which I'm pretty sure will end up being the moral of this whole Koran burning exercise when all is said and done. Notice how Imam Rauf couldn't resist upping the ante by now claiming that changing the address of the mosque (so much for being a cultural center) will incite worldwide Muslim terror and rage.

This is the war huck, you just don't realize it.

You said there were no honor killings in America. And then when it was pointed out to you that there were, you blew them off as a mere nothingness.

What you said was actually worse, Pinko!

OMG, thanks for reposting and making yourself look smart and articulate. I needed the laugh… wait, is that you, Joe Biden?

Spoken like a true believer in relativistic morality and ethics, EPIC FAIL Huck!

Building a mosque at GZ is destructive, demeaning, and hateful to all those effected by 9/11, and that is most every American, and many others world wide.

That's your ignorant opinion, kindly take it and shove up your ass next to head.

Actually, the book burning will be over in a few moments and forgotten by mnost in a few weeks, but the mosque will be a reminder for decades to come that the Muslim warriors triumphed over the infidel for decades to come. You're right that these two actions are ne equivalent. Building the 9/11 Victory Mosque is much, much worse.

Have an Evil day

Tom, a word of advice – stop digging.

You were wrong. You got called on it. Admit to yourself you spoke in haste and move on.

Or are you now going to spend the whole day defending a poorly thought-out comment uttered in haste. If that's the case, then we all understand that it's not the issue of honour killings which is important, it's your ego which is important.

I know it must gall you to no end that it was Nixon who tripped up your narrative because I can't think of another regular here for whom you have shown such obvious dislike and for whom you have such great disrespect – well, with the possible exception of Stan.

But, he got you buddy. Accept it. It's the first step toward healing.

Says the drug addled clown who this time yesterday who held out six examples (two of which were the low level crime of vandalism) of unknown date and provinance as “proof” that there was some rising wave of anti-Muslim “hate crimes” occuring in the US.

And I bet you wonder why no one here takes you seriously…

TR

I can't think of another regular here for whom you have shown such obvious dislike and for whom you have such great disrespect – well, with the possible exception of Stan.

*waves hand*

Well, there is always me! ;-)

TR

I don't see Sharia law coming to this country any time soon. Or anytime.

Her statement was made for show not substance. If she really meant it she would have said it earlier.

[simple enough for you now?]

The fact that you don't see it only means you are blind or stupid, Jane.

Or do you prefer to be called Wineopolis?

Sorry, TR. Of course, TPD dislikes you as much as he dislikes Nixon or Stan. No slight intended. ;-)

Have another bucket o' gravy, Hog Jowls.

Hehehe…

None taken my friend.

I take pride in my enemies. They are a measure that you are doing something right as no one would bother to attack you if you were not percieved as a threat.

Pothead can't stand me because I'm always going after his friends the trolls and it was me who exposed his drug habit for all to see.

TR

ooh fat jokes, so original and mature!!!

At least I can lose weight, your stupidity is incurable from what we've been told.

How long has this been in media, oh that's right, less than a week!! She got her statement out 9/8/10, Obama's statement came out 9/9/10!!! Palin wins you lose, and all the world laughs at your pathetic attacks.

Yes, and neither did the Europeans. Yet we have no-go areas in the Banlieus of Paris now.

That was the point tblrk2006 was trying to make.
It's like the plague, you dont see it coming, then wham!

How do you know that the people of that church do not share that opinion? Have you heard anyone from that Church declare that the book burning is not a provocative, demeaning act? Based on what I know and the language being used by the pastor of that church defending his position that I have heard is that it is essentially because they share this opinion of the provocative, demeaning nature of the, which is why they are doing it. We do know that the proponents of the ground zero mosque, and many of their defenders, explain the purpose for the project as one of hoping to foster constructive interfaith dialogue and promoting a vision of Islam that is not one of destructive fundamentalism. Have you heard anyone supporting this Koran book burning speak of the act as anything other than intentionally provocative, demeaning, and hateful? In terms of constitutional rights, you and I agree. On that point, it is as simple as that. My original point, which is being obfuscated here, has nothing to do with constitutional rights, but of positing a false moral equivalence about the relative “insensitivity” of each of the two acts. They are not even in the same ballpark; and it is cynical and disingenuous of folks like Sarah Palin to claim that they are nothing more than one and the same kinds of expression of “insensitivity.” Objectively, they are not. And I believe you know this.

How do you know that the people of that church do not share that opinion?

The fact that they haven't tossed this “minister” out on his ear or left for other churches.

So how much “earlier” would she had to have said it in order to “really mean it”? How long is the acceptable delay, in your mind? Two days? One? An hour? Is Sarah Palin now required to be constantly in front of a camera so she can immediately respond to any important event within the nanosecond of its occurrence?

Is that what you're saying, you clod?

“How do you know that the people of that church do not share that opinion?”

 

Frankly, it doesn't matter who agrees with him and who doesn't. Are you telling me this man has no right to express his opinion? That his First Amendment rights are summarily suspended because it might upset some people? I don't recall anyone on the Left arguing that burning the American flag should be stopped because some people don't like it. I don't recall anyone on the Left saying that pornography should be stopped because some people might get upset. I do recall, however, many people on the left telling me that we all have to be tolerant of free expression when faced with a crucifix dunked in piss, a painting of the Virgin Mary smeared with shit, or a mosque built within earshot of Ground Zero. Where is that famous tolerance for religious freedom now, Huck? Now, MY OPINION is that burning the Qur'an is a deliberately provocative and wrong. This man's opinion is different. I don't like what he's doing, but he has every right to do it.

“My original point, which is being obfuscated here, has nothing to do with constitutional rights, but of positing a false moral equivalence about the relative “insensitivity” of each of the two acts.”

Yeah. One is a deliberately and calculatedly provocative act designed to anger and annoy a certain segment of the population, done in the name of religion. The other is… hey, wait a minute.

GZ used to be a Burlington Coat Factory? Due tell HJowls.

Flagged for being a pompous ass.